Michael Brissenden presents AM Monday to Friday from 8:00am on ABC Local Radio and 7:10am on Radio National. Join Elizabeth Jackson for the Saturday edition at 8am on Local Radio and 7am on Radio National.

James Hardie has moral obligation to pay up: Combet

AM - Wednesday, 22 September , 2004 08:10:00

Reporter: Tony Eastley

TONY EASTLEY: While the Inquiry found that James Hardie is now not legally obliged to pay compensation, it did conclude that James Hardie has a moral obligation to do so.

And the man who will have a large say in determining that compensation is ACTU Secretary, Greg Combet.

I spoke to him just a short while ago.

Greg Combet, as far as you're concerned, what is needed now in terms of providing proper compensation for asbestos victims?

GREG COMBET: Well the solution is quite simple really and it always has been. And that is that James Hardie should essentially underwrite for Medical Research and Compensation Foundation which they established several years ago. And when I say underwrite it, simply to make sure that sufficient funding is available to that foundation so that it can pay asbestos claimants.

TONY EASTLEY: Of course James Hardie has no legal obligation to pay, does it? Should there be legislation to make it pay the level of compensation that you're talking about?

GREG COMBET: Well I don't agree with that interpretation. I think they do have a legal obligation to pay. Probably what's more appropriate to say is that there might be a few legal hurdles that the company could put in the way to enforce that obligation. But I think as Mr Jackson canvasses in the report, none of us want to have to embark upon lengthy and very costly litigation. There is a moral and ethical obligation here as well as a legal one in my view, for the company to now face up and to pay, and that's what I hope to be sitting down with the company to discuss as soon as possible.

TONY EASTLEY: James Hardie says it's paying out $400-million in legal costs. Will the ACTU back a scheme that enables them to reduce those costs?

GREG COMBET: Well of course anything James Hardie says I hope people now have some scepticism about and that's just another load of rubbish of course. Yes, there are legal costs in the system, but largely that has historically been driven by the refusal of the company to accept its liability. And a claimant then, a person who's got asbestosis or mesothelioma has no other course of action available other than to litigate against them. And that's what drives legal costs.

We believe that we can streamline the current system to some degree to try and bring those costs down, but there's no way in the world that we're going to give up the rights of asbestos victims to seek legal representation and pursue their common law rights if that's what they need.

TONY EASTLEY: How many victims do you think are out there and how long will these claims continue for?

GREG COMBET: Well, we've seen many thousands of people die already, and that's not an exaggeration. Unfortunately, I think whilst no one can precisely predict this, there are going to be many thousands more people die of mesothelioma and contract also other asbestos diseases like asbestosis in the years to come.

TONY EASTLEY: When we talk about years to come are we talking single years or decades?

GREG COMBET: We're talking decades. And in fact there are people who perhaps haven't even been exposed to products yet from which they may contract mesothelioma, for example, some people might have an asbestos fibro garage in their backyard and decide to pull one down one day in six months time and breathe in some dust then. You know, what we obviously…

TONY EASTLEY: But those people would know the dangers, so are you saying James Hardie would be liable for their miscalculation?

GREG COMBET: Well they don't necessarily know the dangers at all, and it is why I think James Hardie and governments around the country – all interested parties – need to embark upon a far more concerted public awareness campaign as well. We want to prevent people making mistakes, we want to prevent people being exposed to these products, and we need a much stronger code, if you like, in the building and home renovation industry to make sure that when there is an asbestos product there, it's identified quickly and handled appropriately and that people are not exposed inadvertently.

TONY EASTLEY: But you are saying that in 20, or even 30 years' time James Hardie could be still contributing to asbestos victims.

GREG COMBET: Oh, I think there's no doubt that they will be. I think we're looking at at least 30, 40, 50 years out that unfortunately there could still well be people just you know finding they've got mesothelioma. It's generally accepted that mesothelioma cancers, which are only caused by asbestos inhalation, generally take 25 to 40 years to gestate.

TONY EASTLEY: And James Hardie would still be paying?

GREG COMBET: Yes they would be. Well, they were negligent. They produced these products from 1930 until the late 1980s, they knew at least from the thirties that they caused bad health effects, they knew at least from the 1950s that asbestos caused cancer, and yet they continued to produce them and they did not provide any warning.

And one of the reasons why liability has been found against them over the last decade or two is because of the fact that they hid it. They were negligent, they knew the health effects, they continued to produce the products, they provided no warnings, that's why they're liable and that's why they're in this trouble now.